Santosh Kumar Ghritlahre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5864 of 2018

1. Santosh Kumar Ghritlahre S/o S/o Shri Ganga Ram Ghritlahre Aged About 35 Years Presently Working As Lecturer Panchayat At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Giroudpuri Block Kasdole District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

2. Subhash Kumar Satnami S/o S/o Shri Maya Ram Satnami Aged About 35 Years Presently Working As Lecturer Panchayat At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Malda Block Kasdole District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

3. Rupesh Kumar Tandan S/o S/o Shri Bhagirathi Tandan Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Lecturer Panchayat At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Malda Block Kasdole District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

4. Smt. Manjulata Diwakar W/o W/o Shri Subhash Kumar Diwakar Aged About 33 Years Earlier Manjulata Dahariya, Presently Working As Lecturer Panchayat At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pangam Block Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

5. Rameshwar Prasad Diwakar D/o S/o Shri Maya Ram Diwakar Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Lecturer Panchayat At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Baloda Block Kasdole, District BalodabazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya P. S. Rakhi Tahsil Aarang Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Secretary Department Of Education, Mantralaya, P. S. Rakhi, Tahsil Aarang Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

----Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri CJK Rao, Advocate For State :

Shri RN Pusty, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/09/2018

1. The limited prayer which the petitioners have sought in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioners for grant of two advance increments on their obtaining B.Ed./D.Ed. certificate both prior to appointment as well as subsequent

to the appointment which is being otherwise provided to the Govt. teachers.

2. The claim of the petitioners is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by them as Shiksha Karmis are identical and similar to the government teachers and their services have also now got merged with the Education Department. Therefore, the benefits which are being extended to the government teachers should also be extended to the petitioners.

3. Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioners would require a policy decision on the part of the State Govt., this court does not intend to keep the petition pending any further, rather ends of justice would meet if the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 & 2 to take a decision in this regard as to whether the petitioners would also be entitled for similar benefits as are being granted to the regular government teachers. It is ordered accordingly. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioners to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 1 & 2 along with fresh representation, if they so prefer.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case so far as the entitlement of the petitioners are concerned. The Respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder